Syracuse, NY – A recent classroom discussion in Syracuse University’s David B. Falk College of Sport and Human Dynamics has drawn national attention after reports alleged that adjunct professor Steven Warshaw used a racial slur in a lecture, leading to his removal from teaching. However, several students present in the class argue that the controversy has been mischaracterized and taken out of context.

​

“He wasn’t attacking anyone, and he wasn’t using the word in a way that was meant to offend,” said Alex Grant, a student in the Sport Management program. “He was making a point about how language evolves and how certain words, no matter how offensive, have been historically misused by people in power. The way it was framed in the news completely leaves out the context.”

​

According to multiple students in the class, Warshaw’s lecture focused on sports branding, controversies in team naming, and the impact of language in marketing and culture. The discussion centered around how words and symbols take on different meanings over time and how professional sports organizations have handled backlash over racially insensitive team names.

​

“He was talking about why certain words shouldn’t be used today and was actually condemning their use,” explained Jordan Matthews, majoring in Communications and Rhetoric. “His point was about exposing how these terms have been wrongly normalized in some spaces, and why we need to be careful with the language we use in sports and beyond.”

​

The Daily Orange article, which first broke the story, reported that Warshaw used an offensive term and that some students anonymously stated they were uncomfortable with the discussion. However, students like Maria Sanchez, focusing on a career in Sports Media, believe that the article left out key details.

​

“It’s frustrating because a lot of us understood exactly what he was trying to do, and now it feels like the situation is being twisted,” Sanchez said. “He wasn’t throwing around slurs—he was highlighting how these words have been abused in the past, often by people in positions of power, and why they still hold so much weight.”

Warshaw, who has remained largely quiet on the issue, has also raised concerns about the lack of professional outreach from the reporter before publishing the original article.

​

“I was never contacted before the article went live,” Warshaw said. “Not an email, not a phone call—nothing. Months later, I get a Facebook Messenger message from the reporter, after the damage was already done. That is not journalism. That is a hit job.” "The irony here is that SPM225 is meant to teach critical and creative thinking, but the university leadership had no interest in even discussing the matter."

​

Several students have voiced concerns that the university’s decision to remove Warshaw from his position was made too quickly, without taking into account the full classroom experience.

​

“I think we need to be really careful about misrepresenting discussions that are meant to educate,” said Ethan Taylor, majoring in Sport Analytics. “It’s not fair to reduce an entire lesson on cultural awareness and branding to just one sentence that someone found offensive. I didn’t feel attacked or uncomfortable. If anything, it was eye-opening.”

 

While the university has not issued further comment beyond confirming Warshaw’s removal, the debate over intent vs. interpretation in classroom discussions continues. Some students are calling for more transparency in how these cases are handled, as well as better avenues for nuanced conversations in academic settings.

​

“In a class about sports, branding, and media, we should be able to have honest conversations,” Grant added. “It’s how we learn. If we can’t talk about uncomfortable history, we can’t fix anything.”

​

For now, Warshaw remains off the teaching schedule, but students say they hope this incident will spark a broader discussion about how universities navigate difficult but necessary conversations in academic spaces.